Belanger v. City of Nashua
Decision Date | 11 May 1981 |
Docket Number | No. 80-148,80-148 |
Citation | 121 N.H. 389,430 A.2d 166 |
Parties | Mary BELANGER et al. v. CITY OF NASHUA et al. |
Court | New Hampshire Supreme Court |
Gottesman & Hollis, Nashua (David M. Gottesman, Nashua, on brief and orally), for plaintiffs.
Robert P. Sullivan, Nashua, on brief and orally, for defendants.
This case comes before us on appeal from a ruling of the superior court, which vacated an order of the Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment as being unreasonable. The defendants, the City of Nashua and its zoning board of adjustment, argue that the court's denial of the city's request for a ruling that the zoning board's finding must be held "prima facie unlawful and reasonable," RSA 31:78 (Supp.1979), constituted reversible error. They also allege that the court erred in not determining the spirit of the zoning ordinance on the basis of the comprehensive plan according to which it was enacted. We disagree with the defendants' arguments and affirm.
The premises that are the subject of this appeal consist of a two-story building owned by the plaintiffs and located on Main Street in Nashua in a Class A Urban Residence District, as defined in the Nashua zoning ordinance. For approximately fifteen years prior to the request for a variance, Mary Belanger, one of the plaintiffs, has lived in the house and has operated a real estate office on the first floor. Although the zoning ordinance does not permit commercial use of property located in this zone, it does allow this particular use to continue as a non-conforming use because it pre- dates the inception of the ordinance's prohibition. Nashua, N.H., Rev. Ordinances title 8, ch. 7, § 604 (1977). In contemplation of a sale of the premises, the plaintiffs, on October 25, 1979, applied to the Nashua Zoning Board of Adjustment for a variance that would allow for the expansion of the non-conforming commercial use throughout the house.
The zoning board held a hearing on November 27, 1979, at which it denied the plaintiffs' application because the requested use was "not in the spirit of the ordinance." After the plaintiffs had been denied a rehearing by the board, they filed an appeal to the superior court under RSA 31:77 (Supp.1979). The Trial Court (Goode, J.), after a hearing on February 14 and 15, 1980, entered an order in which he denied certain of the city's requests for findings and vacated the zoning board's order. His order, from which the defendants appeal, further stated that:
The defendants argue that the trial court erred in not regarding the findings of the zoning board as prima facie lawful and reasonable. They direct our attention to the court's denial of their request that "(t)he finding by the zoning board that the requested use would not be in the spirit of the ordinance must be held to be prima facie lawful and reasonable." Although this finding by the court might alone constitute error, when read in the context of the court's ultimate finding of the unreasonableness of the zoning board's decision based on a balancing of the probabilities, and especially in conjunction with its denial of another of the defendants' requests by which it essentially concluded that the plaintiffs had "overcome the statutory presumption of lawfulness and reasonableness of the finding of the zoning board " (emphasis added), we find no error. See Slater v. Planning Bd. of Town of Rumney, supra; Sprague v. Town of Acworth, 120 N.H. 641, 644, 419 A.2d 1075, 1076 (1980); Burns v. Bradley, 120 N.H. 542, 546-47, 419 A.2d 1069, 1072 (1980).
The defendants also...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Town of Hampton v. Brust
...not affect the principles that zoning ordinances must "reflect the current character of neighborhoods," see Belanger v. City of Nashua, 121 N.H. 389, 393, 430 A.2d 166, 169 (1981), and that variances for limited expansion are proper if the commercial area would now be reasonably compatible ......
-
Simplex Techs., Inc. v. Town of Newington
...is inconsistent with the notion that zoning ordinances must be consistent with the character of the neighborhoods they regulate. In Belanger v. City of Nashua, the zoning board of adjustment denied a land owner a variance to expand a nonconforming commercial use from one room of her house t......
-
Colby v. Town of Rye
...RSA 31:78 (Supp.1981); Burke v. Town of Jaffrey, 122 N.H. ---, ---, 446 A.2d 1169, 1171 (1982); Belanger v. City of Nashua, 121 N.H. 389, 391, 430 A.2d 166, 168 (1981). In the case at bar, the master found that the plaintiffs did not show that the denial of the variance would result in unne......
-
Barrington East Cluster I Unit Owners' Ass'n v. Town of Barrington, 79-468
...of proof is on the appealing party to show that the decision of the board is unlawful or unreasonable. Belanger v. City of Nashua, 121 N.H. ---, ---, 430 A.2d 166, 168 (1981); RSA 31:78 (Supp.1979). Furthermore, all findings of the board are prima facie reasonable and lawful. Belanger v. Ci......